Date: 3.1.2012 Three Misconceptions about age and L2 learning Stefka H. Marinova-Tood,D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow
This article deals with the issue of age comparing with learning L2. The main argument that age is a major affecting factor when learning L2. The aim of the article, thus, is to clarify the misconceptions about L2 learning in different ages by offering evidence depending on the relevant literature. Authors explain that age differences reflect differences in the learning situation rather than learning capacity, they also emphasize the same case for native speakers of the target language. Researchers relate the period of lifetime to learn a second language as the //critical period// for successful language acquisition. It refers to a period of time, It is before or at maturity, when successful acquiring L2 is achieved, and the learner is more likely to achieve nativelike competence and ability. In case of real existence of the critical period, linguistics recommend consideration of level of proficiency to reach particularly when teaching adults, in addition to exposure to the second language for young learners. In spite of the claim of existence of a critical period, as I mentioned this article presents three misconceptions concerning age and acquisition of a second language, trying to approve the capacity of acquiring a second language to a high degree of mastery with no relevance to age. The argument against a critical period is based on several studies which investigated different situations of young and adult L2 learners. Accordingly, many children are faced with obstacles throughout the process of learning L2 and find it frustrating as well as older learners, and there are proficient adult learners. The three fallacies discussed are: First, Misinterpretation: there is a popular common belief that the sooner the better concerning learning additional language. In other words, learning L2 is quicker and easier when it's done in childhood rather than adulthood. However, based on certain studies this belief is mistaken. It has been approved that older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning. Children are slow and require more effort than adults. In other words, in the same period of time older learners are able to acquire L2 more rapidly than younger learners. It was also found that adults performed better than younger learners at early stages of phonological acquisition.
Second, Misattribution: The first claim is presented here that there is no particular theory to agree on of how second languages are acquired. Researchers tend to support the explanation given by neuroscientists that the different location of two languages within the brain account for differences in the levels of proficiency. However, there is no evidence that the localization of the processing of tasks in any part of the brain was associated with better performance. Thus, there is no relation between differences in brain activation patterns and differences in L2 proficiency concerning a critical period. So, difference in proficiency does not relate to different localization of languages in the brain. The lack of evidence and theory to determine how all that affect learning, it is referred mainly to motivation which is believed to play a determining role in acquiring second language successfully.Final misconception is misemphasis: Because of the critical period theory, emphasis was mainly placed on unsuccessful L2 learners, rather than proficient older learners who achieved native-like proficiency. Moreover, it was assumed that all adult learners are unable to master an L2 ignoring the fact that older learners show different degrees of variation in proficiency. Out of problematic testing conditions, successful L2 learners are not noticed. One test, for example, has examined the accent of L2 learners ignoring the fact that even native speakers have different accents and that vary from the standard. Thus accent does not indicate successful L2 acquisition. The mistaken judgment is influenced by the mistaken belief that children are more capable of achieving the accent similar to the native one. It is suggested that even with appropriate testing, learners may still handle with difficulties. One factor relates to the environment in which a language is learned. A study has indicated that when a person is exposed to the language in an environment where the target language is practiced it positively affects the his pronunciation. Regarding the role of motivation, it seems that it has a critical role when learning a second language, in addition to other variables such as cognitive aptitude and beliefs.To conclude, the belief of the critical period has lead into three fallacies. Based on the studies presented in the article, the critical period does not limit or hinder language learning, but it may has an influence over learners associated with social, psychological, educational. Therefore, administrators, educators and parents should not rely the assumption that early learning is more effective than late language. A research by Singleton 97' has shown that teaching a language in formal sets is useful only when it's followed by well designed language instruction build on previous learning. The failure of bilingual education isn't related to the English instruction for children attending bilingual classes. The role of L2 teachers is to influence the learning environment and learner' motivation to improve their students' learning.
My point of view I believe that age may affect language learning but it is also associated with other factors concerning the desire and willingness to learn a foreign language, attitude of the learner towards the nation speaking the target language, and educational aims. Both, older learners and young learners can achieve a high degree of proficiency with efforts and self-study, but only after mastering the first language, otherwise it's worthless. I also had a mistaken idea that the sooner is the better. As a parent, I've decided that there is no reason to rush and teach my daughter foreign languages, until she's mature enough and ready to do so because I tried but failed. I also believe that teachers can play a major role of delivering the language successfully and improve their students performance when considering their degrees of proficiency, increase their motivation and try to teach in enjoyable and pleasant atmosphere.
Final summary Three Misconceptions about age and L2 learning Stefka H. Marinova-Tood,D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow
This article deals with the issue of age comparing with learning L2. The main argument that age is a major affecting factor when learning L2. The aim of the article, thus, is to clarify the misconceptions about L2 learning in different ages by offering evidence depending on the relevant literature. Authors explain that age differences reflect differences in the learning situation rather than learning capacity, they also emphasize the same case for native speakers of the target language. Researchers relate the period of lifetime to learn a second language as the //critical period// for successful language acquisition. It refers to a period of time, It is before or at maturity, when successful acquiring L2 is achieved, and the learner is more likely to achieve nativelike competence and ability. In case of real existence of the critical period, linguistics recommend consideration of level of proficiency to reach particularly when teaching adults, in addition to exposure to the second language for young learners. In spite of the claim of existence of a critical period, as I mentioned this article presents three misconceptions concerning age and acquisition of a second language, trying to approve the capacity of acquiring a second language to a high degree of mastery with no relevance to age. The argument against a critical period is based on several studies which investigated different situations of young and adult L2 learners. Accordingly, many children are faced with obstacles throughout the process of learning L2 and find it frustrating as well as older learners, and there are proficient adult learners. The three fallacies discussed are: First, Misinterpretation: there is a popular common belief that the sooner the better concerning learning additional language. In other words, learning L2 is quicker and easier when it's done in childhood rather than adulthood. However, based on certain studies this belief is mistaken. It has been approved that older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning. Children are slow and require more effort than adults. In other words, in the same period of time older learners are able to acquire L2 more rapidly than younger learners. It was also found that adults performed better than younger learners at early stages of phonological acquisition. Second, Misattribution: The first claim is presented here that there is no particular theory to agree on of how second languages are acquired. Researchers tend to support the explanation given by neuroscientists that the different location of two languages within the brain account for differences in the levels of proficiency. However, there is no evidence that the localization of the processing of tasks in any part of the brain was associated with better performance. Thus, there is no relation between differences in brain activation patterns and differences in L2 proficiency concerning a critical period. So, difference in proficiency does not relate to different localization of languages in the brain. The lack of evidence and theory to determine how all that affect learning, it is referred mainly to motivation which is believed to play a determining role in acquiring second language successfully.Final misconception is misemphasis: Because of the critical period theory, emphasis was mainly placed on unsuccessful L2 learners, rather than proficient older learners who achieved native-like proficiency. Moreover, it was assumed that all adult learners are unable to master an L2 ignoring the fact that older learners show different degrees of variation in proficiency. Out of problematic testing conditions, successful L2 learners are not noticed. One test, for example, has examined the accent of L2 learners ignoring the fact that even native speakers have different accents and that vary from the standard. Thus accent does not indicate successful L2 acquisition. The mistaken judgment is influenced by the mistaken belief that children are more capable of achieving the accent similar to the native one. It is suggested that even with appropriate testing, learners may still handle with difficulties. One factor relates to the environment in which a language is learned. A study has indicated that when a person is exposed to the language in an environment where the target language is practiced it positively affects the his pronunciation. Regarding the role of motivation, it seems that it has a critical role when learning a second language, in addition to other variables such as cognitive aptitude and beliefs.To conclude, the belief of the critical period has lead into three fallacies. Based on the studies presented in the article, the critical period does not limit or hinder language learning, but it may has an influence over learners associated with social, psychological, educational. Therefore, administrators, educators and parents should not rely the assumption that early learning is more effective than late language. A research by Singleton 97' has shown that teaching a language in formal sets is useful only when it's followed by well designed language instruction build on previous learning. The failure of bilingual education isn't related to the English instruction for children attending bilingual classes. The role of L2 teachers is to influence the learning environment and learner' motivation to improve their students' learning.
My point of view I believe that age may affect language learning but it is also associated with other factors concerning the desire and willingness to learn a foreign language, attitude of the learner towards the nation speaking the target language, and educational aims. Both, older learners and young learners can achieve a high degree of proficiency with efforts and self-study, but only after mastering the first language, otherwise it's worthless. I also had a mistaken idea that the sooner is the better. As a parent, I've decided that there is no reason to rush and teach my daughter foreign languages, until she's mature enough and ready to do so because I tried but failed. I also believe that teachers can play a major role of delivering the language successfully and improve their students performance when considering their degrees of proficiency, increase their motivation and try to teach in enjoyable and pleasant atmosphere.
Looking at my collegues points of view regarding the issue of when to start teaching L2, they all share a main point, and which I can summerize by the following: First, "the sooner, the better" is only a fallacy, There are many factors that may affect acquiring a new language rather than or in addition to age factor, and most important point is the question of "how" is more important than "when" to teach a second language. For example, Irit argued that " older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning". Mdalali tought that exposure to language is more important that age, and she gave an example of her students who acquire English better than Hebrew although they start learning Hebrew earlier than English. Leal also agreed and claimed that there are social and cognitive factors that improve language acqusition. Therefore, she aded, that children should not be rushed or forced to learn a language. Hadeel was confuse, but after reading the article's summary she figured that she didn't have to be stressed specially thinking of her own daughter. Eslam also agreed, she explaned " regarding the topic when to start teaching another language, I think that we should differ between L2 and a FL." She added that exposure is crucial. In addition, she made a very important point related to learners' attitueds towards the language they are learning. She claimed that we as teacher should carefully choose what to teach. Roaa, agreed to all what has said about the topic and added that it is important to master the L1 and then the L2. She explaind that exposure is important and she mentioned the issue of bilinguals. Anna, stressed the "how" rather than the "when". Anna also mention three points providing successful L2 language learning. One point is the opportunity to practice a language. Secondly, a learner having a good reason to learn a new language, will successfuly learn it no matter his/her age is. Third point, a learner, as she said, has to be provided with a strong language model.
Three Misconceptions about age and L2 learning
Stefka H. Marinova-Tood,D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow
This article deals with the issue of age comparing with learning L2. The main argument that age is a major affecting factor when learning L2. The aim of the article, thus, is to clarify the misconceptions about L2 learning in different ages by offering evidence depending on the relevant literature. Authors explain that age differences reflect differences in the learning situation rather than learning capacity, they also emphasize the same case for native speakers of the target language. Researchers relate the period of lifetime to learn a second language as the //critical period// for successful language acquisition. It refers to a period of time, It is before or at maturity, when successful acquiring L2 is achieved, and the learner is more likely to achieve nativelike competence and ability. In case of real existence of the critical period, linguistics recommend consideration of level of proficiency to reach particularly when teaching adults, in addition to exposure to the second language for young learners. In spite of the claim of existence of a critical period, as I mentioned this article presents three misconceptions concerning age and acquisition of a second language, trying to approve the capacity of acquiring a second language to a high degree of mastery with no relevance to age. The argument against a critical period is based on several studies which investigated different situations of young and adult L2 learners. Accordingly, many children are faced with obstacles throughout the process of learning L2 and find it frustrating as well as older learners, and there are proficient adult learners.
The three fallacies discussed are: First, Misinterpretation: there is a popular common belief that the sooner the better concerning learning additional language. In other words, learning L2 is quicker and easier when it's done in childhood rather than adulthood. However, based on certain studies this belief is mistaken. It has been approved that older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning. Children are slow and require more effort than adults. In other words, in the same period of time older learners are able to acquire L2 more rapidly than younger learners. It was also found that adults performed better than younger learners at early stages of phonological acquisition.
Second, Misattribution: The first claim is presented here that there is no particular theory to agree on of how second languages are acquired. Researchers tend to support the explanation given by neuroscientists that the different location of two languages within the brain account for differences in the levels of proficiency. However, there is no evidence that the localization of the processing of tasks in any part of the brain was associated with better performance. Thus, there is no relation between differences in brain activation patterns and differences in L2 proficiency concerning a critical period. So, difference in proficiency does not relate to different localization of languages in the brain. The lack of evidence and theory to determine how all that affect learning, it is referred mainly to motivation which is believed to play a determining role in acquiring second language successfully.Final misconception is misemphasis: Because of the critical period theory, emphasis was mainly placed on unsuccessful L2 learners, rather than proficient older learners who achieved native-like proficiency. Moreover, it was assumed that all adult learners are unable to master an L2 ignoring the fact that older learners show different degrees of variation in proficiency.
Out of problematic testing conditions, successful L2 learners are not noticed. One test, for example, has examined the accent of L2 learners ignoring the fact that even native speakers have different accents and that vary from the standard. Thus accent does not indicate successful L2 acquisition. The mistaken judgment is influenced by the mistaken belief that children are more capable of achieving the accent similar to the native one.
It is suggested that even with appropriate testing, learners may still handle with difficulties. One factor relates to the environment in which a language is learned. A study has indicated that when a person is exposed to the language in an environment where the target language is practiced it positively affects the his pronunciation. Regarding the role of motivation, it seems that it has a critical role when learning a second language, in addition to other variables such as cognitive aptitude and beliefs.To conclude, the belief of the critical period has lead into three fallacies. Based on the studies presented in the article, the critical period does not limit or hinder language learning, but it may has an influence over learners associated with social, psychological, educational. Therefore, administrators, educators and parents should not rely the assumption that early learning is more effective than late language. A research by Singleton 97' has shown that teaching a language in formal sets is useful only when it's followed by well designed language instruction build on previous learning. The failure of bilingual education isn't related to the English instruction for children attending bilingual classes. The role of L2 teachers is to influence the learning environment and learner' motivation to improve their students' learning.
My point of view
I believe that age may affect language learning but it is also associated with other factors concerning the desire and willingness to learn a foreign language, attitude of the learner towards the nation speaking the target language, and educational aims. Both, older learners and young learners can achieve a high degree of proficiency with efforts and self-study, but only after mastering the first language, otherwise it's worthless. I also had a mistaken idea that the sooner is the better. As a parent, I've decided that there is no reason to rush and teach my daughter foreign languages, until she's mature enough and ready to do so because I tried but failed. I also believe that teachers can play a major role of delivering the language successfully and improve their students performance when considering their degrees of proficiency, increase their motivation and try to teach in enjoyable and pleasant atmosphere.
Final summary
Three Misconceptions about age and L2 learning
Stefka H. Marinova-Tood,D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow
This article deals with the issue of age comparing with learning L2. The main argument that age is a major affecting factor when learning L2. The aim of the article, thus, is to clarify the misconceptions about L2 learning in different ages by offering evidence depending on the relevant literature. Authors explain that age differences reflect differences in the learning situation rather than learning capacity, they also emphasize the same case for native speakers of the target language. Researchers relate the period of lifetime to learn a second language as the //critical period// for successful language acquisition. It refers to a period of time, It is before or at maturity, when successful acquiring L2 is achieved, and the learner is more likely to achieve nativelike competence and ability. In case of real existence of the critical period, linguistics recommend consideration of level of proficiency to reach particularly when teaching adults, in addition to exposure to the second language for young learners. In spite of the claim of existence of a critical period, as I mentioned this article presents three misconceptions concerning age and acquisition of a second language, trying to approve the capacity of acquiring a second language to a high degree of mastery with no relevance to age. The argument against a critical period is based on several studies which investigated different situations of young and adult L2 learners. Accordingly, many children are faced with obstacles throughout the process of learning L2 and find it frustrating as well as older learners, and there are proficient adult learners.
The three fallacies discussed are: First, Misinterpretation: there is a popular common belief that the sooner the better concerning learning additional language. In other words, learning L2 is quicker and easier when it's done in childhood rather than adulthood. However, based on certain studies this belief is mistaken. It has been approved that older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning. Children are slow and require more effort than adults. In other words, in the same period of time older learners are able to acquire L2 more rapidly than younger learners. It was also found that adults performed better than younger learners at early stages of phonological acquisition.
Second, Misattribution: The first claim is presented here that there is no particular theory to agree on of how second languages are acquired. Researchers tend to support the explanation given by neuroscientists that the different location of two languages within the brain account for differences in the levels of proficiency. However, there is no evidence that the localization of the processing of tasks in any part of the brain was associated with better performance. Thus, there is no relation between differences in brain activation patterns and differences in L2 proficiency concerning a critical period. So, difference in proficiency does not relate to different localization of languages in the brain. The lack of evidence and theory to determine how all that affect learning, it is referred mainly to motivation which is believed to play a determining role in acquiring second language successfully.Final misconception is misemphasis: Because of the critical period theory, emphasis was mainly placed on unsuccessful L2 learners, rather than proficient older learners who achieved native-like proficiency. Moreover, it was assumed that all adult learners are unable to master an L2 ignoring the fact that older learners show different degrees of variation in proficiency.
Out of problematic testing conditions, successful L2 learners are not noticed. One test, for example, has examined the accent of L2 learners ignoring the fact that even native speakers have different accents and that vary from the standard. Thus accent does not indicate successful L2 acquisition. The mistaken judgment is influenced by the mistaken belief that children are more capable of achieving the accent similar to the native one.
It is suggested that even with appropriate testing, learners may still handle with difficulties. One factor relates to the environment in which a language is learned. A study has indicated that when a person is exposed to the language in an environment where the target language is practiced it positively affects the his pronunciation. Regarding the role of motivation, it seems that it has a critical role when learning a second language, in addition to other variables such as cognitive aptitude and beliefs.To conclude, the belief of the critical period has lead into three fallacies. Based on the studies presented in the article, the critical period does not limit or hinder language learning, but it may has an influence over learners associated with social, psychological, educational. Therefore, administrators, educators and parents should not rely the assumption that early learning is more effective than late language. A research by Singleton 97' has shown that teaching a language in formal sets is useful only when it's followed by well designed language instruction build on previous learning. The failure of bilingual education isn't related to the English instruction for children attending bilingual classes. The role of L2 teachers is to influence the learning environment and learner' motivation to improve their students' learning.
My point of view
I believe that age may affect language learning but it is also associated with other factors concerning the desire and willingness to learn a foreign language, attitude of the learner towards the nation speaking the target language, and educational aims. Both, older learners and young learners can achieve a high degree of proficiency with efforts and self-study, but only after mastering the first language, otherwise it's worthless. I also had a mistaken idea that the sooner is the better. As a parent, I've decided that there is no reason to rush and teach my daughter foreign languages, until she's mature enough and ready to do so because I tried but failed. I also believe that teachers can play a major role of delivering the language successfully and improve their students performance when considering their degrees of proficiency, increase their motivation and try to teach in enjoyable and pleasant atmosphere.
Looking at my collegues points of view regarding the issue of when to start teaching L2, they all share a main point, and which I can summerize by the following: First, "the sooner, the better" is only a fallacy, There are many factors that may affect acquiring a new language rather than or in addition to age factor, and most important point is the question of "how" is more important than "when" to teach a second language. For example, Irit argued that " older learners are faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning". Mdalali tought that exposure to language is more important that age, and she gave an example of her students who acquire English better than Hebrew although they start learning Hebrew earlier than English. Leal also agreed and claimed that there are social and cognitive factors that improve language acqusition. Therefore, she aded, that children should not be rushed or forced to learn a language. Hadeel was confuse, but after reading the article's summary she figured that she didn't have to be stressed specially thinking of her own daughter. Eslam also agreed, she explaned " regarding the topic when to start teaching another language, I think that we should differ between L2 and a FL." She added that exposure is crucial. In addition, she made a very important point related to learners' attitueds towards the language they are learning. She claimed that we as teacher should carefully choose what to teach. Roaa, agreed to all what has said about the topic and added that it is important to master the L1 and then the L2. She explaind that exposure is important and she mentioned the issue of bilinguals. Anna, stressed the "how" rather than the "when". Anna also mention three points providing successful L2 language learning. One point is the opportunity to practice a language. Secondly, a learner having a good reason to learn a new language, will successfuly learn it no matter his/her age is. Third point, a learner, as she said, has to be provided with a strong language model.